[GS] Power Ranking the Civs (Gathering Storm)

[AsparustheSaiyan]

It isn't mentioned in the video but Ceydezed said it was stated in the live stream.



Have to wait and see if this actually happens.

Is this just on higher difficulties? Or does it affect lower difficulties and multiplayer too?

 

[Archon_Wing]

Contrarily, the Hansa is a very cheap source of production, hence the city spam to spam more of them.

Back to that, I just wanted to show off a German grid here on Immortal difficulty. Besides the hills around the capital, the terrain is pretty awful. The northern and western parts of this island is mostly flat and the island to the east is little better. The mountains also heavily restrict where I can build.



Aachen: 40 base production, 43 from Hansa and buildings (33%), 127 total:

Spoiler :

Cologne: 5 base production, 39 from hansa + buildings (67%), 58 production.

Spoiler :

]img]https://i.imgur.com/uBXONbt.jpg[/img]

Trier: 40 base production, 68 from Hansa and buildings (55%), 123 total.
This is the vertical integration city; admittingly this is bloated.

Spoiler :

Frankfurt: 17 base production, 39 from Hansa+ Buildings (51%), 76 total.

Spoiler :

In any case I have these things representing anywhere from a third to over half of the total production; essentiually getting production when it actually matters.

I also think Germany might be the only one to do Veritcal Integration at all. Stacking redundant factories to power a single city can't be a good idea on its own but since the coal plants are worth a good chunk (and don't acutally need coal to give the production), this makes more sense since factories are prerequisite. +9 AOE is pretty cool too. And I have 9 cities for Collosseum, although I acutally didn't realize that... tacked the last city at the end.

Also I'd like to tell everyone I built the Mausoleum which gets that great engineer that makes your workshops give a whopping 2 culture now. That definitely needs a nerf.

 

[Jewelrunna]

Post patch, this is what I think my tier list looks like. Unordered, of course. What follows are my thoughts on the specific changes of the patch.

• Canada's tundra start bias left them with two major problems beyond the fact that their actual bonuses weren't very impactful: they lacked both production and growth, two resources that are vitally important in the early game. Thankfully, that +1 production from tundra/snow mines really helps them out in that regard. They're still quite lackluster, don't get me wrong, but they now sort of fit the archetype of a late-game culture & production juggernaut. Other Civs will still outstrip them in that regard nonetheless, but I would say that they're now competitive.

• I recently have warmed up a bit to the Great Wall, as it's actually a pretty solid defensive tool while giving ok, if not amazing yields. This buff now makes the Great Wall pretty good as a unique improvement, and one that starts out pretty decent and scales quite well. The tourism later on also makes China more competitive in Culture Victories. This buff took an admittedly mediocre improvement into one you might actually want to build, rather than being fairly situational. Still far from being as good as some other improvements in the game, but China players should appreciate this one.

• Egypt got massively buffed in this patch. The Sphinx changes have been turning some heads, and rightfully so; floodplains aren't to hard to come by (especially if you're Egypt and have a starting bias towards them), so that extra culture is pretty easy to acquire. That extra appeal just makes an improvement that was already pretty good for Culture Victories even better. But the real kicker here is that the Maryannu Chariot Archer no longer replaces the Heavy Chariot. I've been a defender of the Chariot Archer for quite a while on here, but even I had to admit that though the unit was pretty strong on its own merits, it was a massive bummer that Egypt lost out on the best city-capturing unit in the Ancient Era. Now, this is no longer the case. Yes, you'll likely have to adjust your unit build if you're playing Egypt (i.e. focus less on early ranged units so you can acquire the Chariot Archer), but if you optimize everything, Egypt is a terrifying neighbor in the early stages of the game. They're about one buff to Iteru (and maybe a new alternate leader) away from being a really, really good Civ imo.

• Finally, the Chateau is no longer a complete joke of a unique improvement! I hesitate to call it good, however, since it's requirements to get those extra yields are a bit more finicky than some others. Still, France can get pretty decent culture and gold from tiles that have these. But despite the buff, France suffers from a lack of bonuses until the Medieval and Renaissance Era, and the rewards they get from making it to that point aren't exactly awe-inspiring either. However, Catherine does get that +3 combat strength provided you play your espionage cards right, so that's something at least. Still quite underwhelming, but at least the Chateau is less of a disappointment.

• Hungary got "nerfed", and I put that term in quotations because this effectively changes nothing for them. Pearl of the Danube is still a completely disgusting ability, and Raven King still allows you to completely swarm your competition with city-state units; the only thing that has changed is that Hungary now has to put in a slight investment for their zerg-rush rather than no investment at all. These nerfs don't really hurt Hungary at all; they're now just reasonably overpowered rather than revoltingly so.

• Along with Egypt, India are the biggest winners of the patch, as it turned Dharma from a joke of a civilization ability into one that's actually really good. Extra amenities from religions in your cities is incredibly good, and with a bit of micromanagement, India can now be the kings of amenities, along with Scotland and Brazil. The extra spread charge from Missionaries also makes them much stronger in Religious Victories. (As a side note, has anyone played India in this patch? If so, can you confirm if this change extends to Apostles? If it does, than this buff is even better than I previous thought.) The extra spread from trade routes is whatever though (and an ability that I feel like Arabia should have for flavor, but hey, I'm not in charge of balancing this game, so what do I know). Chandragupta is higher on this tier list because I think his playstyle will lend more towards a multi-faith empire, and that I think Arthashastra is way better than Satyagraha. Sorry Gandhi; you're one buff from being good though!

• I don't think the patch really changes things for Mali overall, though the general nerf to Democracy is a bummer nonetheless.

• The Maori have probably got whacked by the nerf bat the hardest in this patch, but they're still good. The Marae and the Toa were admittedly really overpowered tools, so this patch just tones them down a bit for the sake of balance. The Toa is no longer a superior version of both the Varu and the Legion combined, and the Marae is no longer a free culture victory. Whatever. They're still great uniques to have for expansion and Culture Victories respectively. Everything I did say about their problematic start earlier in this thread still applies though, so I don't know if they're still quite at the top of the Immortal Tier here. But they're still an excellent Civ regardless, so Maori players shouldn't lose sleep over these nerfs.

• The buff the Netherlands got is mostly flavor, though it is a pretty decent bonus considering their starts are prone to be lowland coasts.

• I absolutely adore these buffs to Norway. Pillaging was admittedly way too abusable a mechanic, due to the ludicrous amounts of science and culture you could garner, but Norway as a Civ were too dependent on it for their viability (or what little they had of it. So what do Firaxis do? They remove that mechanic for everyone but Norway. This both rebalances the game, removing a broken strategy, while still letting the Civilization that actually needs it to retain their niche. Brilliant! Now, this doesn't fix Norways preexisting problems, but it does give them another unique tool to help them compete, which as a Norway player, I love.

• If Spain meets all the criteria for the Mission, it is an absolutely broken unique improvement now. However, colonialist playstyles aren't that great in Civ games, they never have been, and Spain is still dependent on that shoddy framework. On top of that, Spain still has major struggles in the early game. So even though the Mission is really good now, Spain's other problems still drag them down.

• One thing I don't see many people talking about is how the changes to Climate Change could really hurt Indonesia. Indonesia is more dependent on having valuable districts on the coast, and if more tiles are prone to flooding than before, that change could have dire ramifications for them. Granted, you now have more time to prepare for the rising sea levels, but the cost of Flood Barriers varies with how many tiles they'll have to protect. So overall, I'm not sure if this is a net positive or negative for Gitarja, but people should really test Indonesia out and see how they can deal with these changes. This could also hurt Australia, but their appeal-related bonuses aren't just tied to the coast, so they're more well off than Indonesia.

• So, you've probably noticed that I have the Eleanors and England in their own tier. Let's talk about why. Simply put, England is in an extremely sorry state, and I have no idea what the devs want this Civ to do. Their late game bonuses are by in large a joke, and that colonization playstyle just does not work in Civilization games, and it's even worse in Civ VI because of loyalty (unless, of course, you're Phoenicia, but that's more so because of her capital swapping gimmick). And even though Eleanor's unique ability is actually good, she suffers because she's attached to awful Civs. If you play Engleanor, you're tied to a horrible Civ that has little to no synergy with your ability. If you play Freleanor, you have absolutely no bonuses until the Medieval Era. England is garbage, and because Eleanor is associated with two garbage Civs, she unfortunately is as well.

 

[Kmart_Elvis]

@Jewelrunna having played Gandhi recently, I can confirm the extra spreads are only for missionaries, not apostles. I still found them a very strong civ for religious victory. While my faith generation wasn't as high as other religious games I play, I didn't need it. The extra spreads went very far.

 

[Pietato]

View attachment 522114
Post patch, this is what I think my tier list looks like. Unordered, of course. What follows are my thoughts on the specific changes of the patch.

• Canada's tundra start bias left them with two major problems beyond the fact that their actual bonuses weren't very impactful: they lacked both production and growth, two resources that are vitally important in the early game. Thankfully, that +1 production from tundra/snow mines really helps them out in that regard. They're still quite lackluster, don't get me wrong, but they now sort of fit the archetype of a late-game culture & production juggernaut. Other Civs will still outstrip them in that regard nonetheless, but I would say that they're now competitive.

• I recently have warmed up a bit to the Great Wall, as it's actually a pretty solid defensive tool while giving ok, if not amazing yields. This buff now makes the Great Wall pretty good as a unique improvement, and one that starts out pretty decent and scales quite well. The tourism later on also makes China more competitive in Culture Victories. This buff took an admittedly mediocre improvement into one you might actually want to build, rather than being fairly situational. Still far from being as good as some other improvements in the game, but China players should appreciate this one.

• Egypt got massively buffed in this patch. The Sphinx changes have been turning some heads, and rightfully so; floodplains aren't to hard to come by (especially if you're Egypt and have a starting bias towards them), so that extra culture is pretty easy to acquire. That extra appeal just makes an improvement that was already pretty good for Culture Victories even better. But the real kicker here is that the Maryannu Chariot Archer no longer replaces the Heavy Chariot. I've been a defender of the Chariot Archer for quite a while on here, but even I had to admit that though the unit was pretty strong on its own merits, it was a massive bummer that Egypt lost out on the best city-capturing unit in the Ancient Era. Now, this is no longer the case. Yes, you'll likely have to adjust your unit build if you're playing Egypt (i.e. focus less on early ranged units so you can acquire the Chariot Archer), but if you optimize everything, Egypt is a terrifying neighbor in the early stages of the game. They're about one buff to Iteru (and maybe a new alternate leader) away from being a really, really good Civ imo.

• Finally, the Chateau is no longer a complete joke of a unique improvement! I hesitate to call it good, however, since it's requirements to get those extra yields are a bit more finicky than some others. Still, France can get pretty decent culture and gold from tiles that have these. But despite the buff, France suffers from a lack of bonuses until the Medieval and Renaissance Era, and the rewards they get from making it to that point aren't exactly awe-inspiring either. However, Catherine does get that +3 combat strength provided you play your espionage cards right, so that's something at least. Still quite underwhelming, but at least the Chateau is less of a disappointment.

• Hungary got "nerfed", and I put that term in quotations because this effectively changes nothing for them. Pearl of the Danube is still a completely disgusting ability, and Raven King still allows you to completely swarm your competition with city-state units; the only thing that has changed is that Hungary now has to put in a slight investment for their zerg-rush rather than no investment at all. These nerfs don't really hurt Hungary at all; they're now just reasonably overpowered rather than revoltingly so.

• Along with Egypt, India are the biggest winners of the patch, as it turned Dharma from a joke of a civilization ability into one that's actually really good. Extra amenities from religions in your cities is incredibly good, and with a bit of micromanagement, India can now be the kings of amenities, along with Scotland and Brazil. The extra spread charge from Missionaries also makes them much stronger in Religious Victories. (As a side note, has anyone played India in this patch? If so, can you confirm if this change extends to Apostles? If it does, than this buff is even better than I previous thought.) The extra spread from trade routes is whatever though (and an ability that I feel like Arabia should have for flavor, but hey, I'm not in charge of balancing this game, so what do I know). Chandragupta is higher on this tier list because I think his playstyle will lend more towards a multi-faith empire, and that I think Arthashastra is way better than Satyagraha. Sorry Gandhi; you're one buff from being good though!

• I don't think the patch really changes things for Mali overall, though the general nerf to Democracy is a bummer nonetheless.

• The Maori have probably got whacked by the nerf bat the hardest in this patch, but they're still good. The Marae and the Toa were admittedly really overpowered tools, so this patch just tones them down a bit for the sake of balance. The Toa is no longer a superior version of both the Varu and the Legion combined, and the Marae is no longer a free culture victory. Whatever. They're still great uniques to have for expansion and Culture Victories respectively. Everything I did say about their problematic start earlier in this thread still applies though, so I don't know if they're still quite at the top of the Immortal Tier here. But they're still an excellent Civ regardless, so Maori players shouldn't lose sleep over these nerfs.

• The buff the Netherlands got is mostly flavor, though it is a pretty decent bonus considering their starts are prone to be lowland coasts.

• I absolutely adore these buffs to Norway. Pillaging was admittedly way too abusable a mechanic, due to the ludicrous amounts of science and culture you could garner, but Norway as a Civ were too dependent on it for their viability (or what little they had of it. So what do Firaxis do? They remove that mechanic for everyone but Norway. This both rebalances the game, removing a broken strategy, while still letting the Civilization that actually needs it to retain their niche. Brilliant! Now, this doesn't fix Norways preexisting problems, but it does give them another unique tool to help them compete, which as a Norway player, I love.

• If Spain meets all the criteria for the Mission, it is an absolutely broken unique improvement now. However, colonialist playstyles aren't that great in Civ games, they never have been, and Spain is still dependent on that shoddy framework. On top of that, Spain still has major struggles in the early game. So even though the Mission is really good now, Spain's other problems still drag them down.

• One thing I don't see many people talking about is how the changes to Climate Change could really hurt Indonesia. Indonesia is more dependent on having valuable districts on the coast, and if more tiles are prone to flooding than before, that change could have dire ramifications for them. Granted, you now have more time to prepare for the rising sea levels, but the cost of Flood Barriers varies with how many tiles they'll have to protect. So overall, I'm not sure if this is a net positive or negative for Gitarja, but people should really test Indonesia out and see how they can deal with these changes. This could also hurt Australia, but their appeal-related bonuses aren't just tied to the coast, so they're more well off than Indonesia.

• So, you've probably noticed that I have the Eleanors and England in their own tier. Let's talk about why. Simply put, England is in an extremely sorry state, and I have no idea what the devs want this Civ to do. Their late game bonuses are by in large a joke, and that colonization playstyle just does not work in Civilization games, and it's even worse in Civ VI because of loyalty (unless, of course, you're Phoenicia, but that's more so because of her capital swapping gimmick). And even though Eleanor's unique ability is actually good, she suffers because she's attached to awful Civs. If you play Engleanor, you're tied to a horrible Civ that has little to no synergy with your ability. If you play Freleanor, you have absolutely no bonuses until the Medieval Era. England is garbage, and because Eleanor is associated with two garbage Civs, she unfortunately is as well.

Chateau was NERFED, not buffed, Egypt are still weak, and Canada are still trash. You also severely underestimate Kristina and (especially) Pericles.

 

[Archon_Wing]

IMO the chateau is actually even worse now, because now you need 2 wonders to get the same effect as before, and how many wonders can you possibly build that are also adjacency to a river space you don't need?

Egypt is indeed no longer a negative civ, though it really remains to be seen. Canada despite the buff is still a negative civ and thus still the worst. Though French Eleanor is pretty awful atm given the chateau.

As much as we meme on England, one cannot doubt the power of the Royal Navy Dockyard. It is still a good source of income and Great Admirals and that still means England has use on island maps. Now you might not actually care about any of this, but it's still there. I can say for certain that it actually does something which I really can't say about say Spain, Norway, or Canada. Well maybe the new mission is good; I dunno.

Now I do think that's the only good thing about them. Should they ever nerf harbors, they may as well just delete the civ. (I guess you guys are playing Dido anyways)

Although it is kinda hillarious that some of the weaker civs like England got nerfed. Georgia is effectively stronger in GS not because they really got any better, but because there are worse civs now lel.

 

[AsparustheSaiyan]

View attachment 522114
Post patch, this is what I think my tier list looks like. Unordered, of course. What follows are my thoughts on the specific changes of the patch.

• Canada's tundra start bias left them with two major problems beyond the fact that their actual bonuses weren't very impactful: they lacked both production and growth, two resources that are vitally important in the early game. Thankfully, that +1 production from tundra/snow mines really helps them out in that regard. They're still quite lackluster, don't get me wrong, but they now sort of fit the archetype of a late-game culture & production juggernaut. Other Civs will still outstrip them in that regard nonetheless, but I would say that they're now competitive.

• I recently have warmed up a bit to the Great Wall, as it's actually a pretty solid defensive tool while giving ok, if not amazing yields. This buff now makes the Great Wall pretty good as a unique improvement, and one that starts out pretty decent and scales quite well. The tourism later on also makes China more competitive in Culture Victories. This buff took an admittedly mediocre improvement into one you might actually want to build, rather than being fairly situational. Still far from being as good as some other improvements in the game, but China players should appreciate this one.

• Egypt got massively buffed in this patch. The Sphinx changes have been turning some heads, and rightfully so; floodplains aren't to hard to come by (especially if you're Egypt and have a starting bias towards them), so that extra culture is pretty easy to acquire. That extra appeal just makes an improvement that was already pretty good for Culture Victories even better. But the real kicker here is that the Maryannu Chariot Archer no longer replaces the Heavy Chariot. I've been a defender of the Chariot Archer for quite a while on here, but even I had to admit that though the unit was pretty strong on its own merits, it was a massive bummer that Egypt lost out on the best city-capturing unit in the Ancient Era. Now, this is no longer the case. Yes, you'll likely have to adjust your unit build if you're playing Egypt (i.e. focus less on early ranged units so you can acquire the Chariot Archer), but if you optimize everything, Egypt is a terrifying neighbor in the early stages of the game. They're about one buff to Iteru (and maybe a new alternate leader) away from being a really, really good Civ imo.

• Finally, the Chateau is no longer a complete joke of a unique improvement! I hesitate to call it good, however, since it's requirements to get those extra yields are a bit more finicky than some others. Still, France can get pretty decent culture and gold from tiles that have these. But despite the buff, France suffers from a lack of bonuses until the Medieval and Renaissance Era, and the rewards they get from making it to that point aren't exactly awe-inspiring either. However, Catherine does get that +3 combat strength provided you play your espionage cards right, so that's something at least. Still quite underwhelming, but at least the Chateau is less of a disappointment.

• Hungary got "nerfed", and I put that term in quotations because this effectively changes nothing for them. Pearl of the Danube is still a completely disgusting ability, and Raven King still allows you to completely swarm your competition with city-state units; the only thing that has changed is that Hungary now has to put in a slight investment for their zerg-rush rather than no investment at all. These nerfs don't really hurt Hungary at all; they're now just reasonably overpowered rather than revoltingly so.

• Along with Egypt, India are the biggest winners of the patch, as it turned Dharma from a joke of a civilization ability into one that's actually really good. Extra amenities from religions in your cities is incredibly good, and with a bit of micromanagement, India can now be the kings of amenities, along with Scotland and Brazil. The extra spread charge from Missionaries also makes them much stronger in Religious Victories. (As a side note, has anyone played India in this patch? If so, can you confirm if this change extends to Apostles? If it does, than this buff is even better than I previous thought.) The extra spread from trade routes is whatever though (and an ability that I feel like Arabia should have for flavor, but hey, I'm not in charge of balancing this game, so what do I know). Chandragupta is higher on this tier list because I think his playstyle will lend more towards a multi-faith empire, and that I think Arthashastra is way better than Satyagraha. Sorry Gandhi; you're one buff from being good though!

• I don't think the patch really changes things for Mali overall, though the general nerf to Democracy is a bummer nonetheless.

• The Maori have probably got whacked by the nerf bat the hardest in this patch, but they're still good. The Marae and the Toa were admittedly really overpowered tools, so this patch just tones them down a bit for the sake of balance. The Toa is no longer a superior version of both the Varu and the Legion combined, and the Marae is no longer a free culture victory. Whatever. They're still great uniques to have for expansion and Culture Victories respectively. Everything I did say about their problematic start earlier in this thread still applies though, so I don't know if they're still quite at the top of the Immortal Tier here. But they're still an excellent Civ regardless, so Maori players shouldn't lose sleep over these nerfs.

• The buff the Netherlands got is mostly flavor, though it is a pretty decent bonus considering their starts are prone to be lowland coasts.

• I absolutely adore these buffs to Norway. Pillaging was admittedly way too abusable a mechanic, due to the ludicrous amounts of science and culture you could garner, but Norway as a Civ were too dependent on it for their viability (or what little they had of it. So what do Firaxis do? They remove that mechanic for everyone but Norway. This both rebalances the game, removing a broken strategy, while still letting the Civilization that actually needs it to retain their niche. Brilliant! Now, this doesn't fix Norways preexisting problems, but it does give them another unique tool to help them compete, which as a Norway player, I love.

• If Spain meets all the criteria for the Mission, it is an absolutely broken unique improvement now. However, colonialist playstyles aren't that great in Civ games, they never have been, and Spain is still dependent on that shoddy framework. On top of that, Spain still has major struggles in the early game. So even though the Mission is really good now, Spain's other problems still drag them down.

• One thing I don't see many people talking about is how the changes to Climate Change could really hurt Indonesia. Indonesia is more dependent on having valuable districts on the coast, and if more tiles are prone to flooding than before, that change could have dire ramifications for them. Granted, you now have more time to prepare for the rising sea levels, but the cost of Flood Barriers varies with how many tiles they'll have to protect. So overall, I'm not sure if this is a net positive or negative for Gitarja, but people should really test Indonesia out and see how they can deal with these changes. This could also hurt Australia, but their appeal-related bonuses aren't just tied to the coast, so they're more well off than Indonesia.

• So, you've probably noticed that I have the Eleanors and England in their own tier. Let's talk about why. Simply put, England is in an extremely sorry state, and I have no idea what the devs want this Civ to do. Their late game bonuses are by in large a joke, and that colonization playstyle just does not work in Civilization games, and it's even worse in Civ VI because of loyalty (unless, of course, you're Phoenicia, but that's more so because of her capital swapping gimmick). And even though Eleanor's unique ability is actually good, she suffers because she's attached to awful Civs. If you play Engleanor, you're tied to a horrible Civ that has little to no synergy with your ability. If you play Freleanor, you have absolutely no bonuses until the Medieval Era. England is garbage, and because Eleanor is associated with two garbage Civs, she unfortunately is as well.

Nice! I'm very tempted to update mine. Obviously though im not the most experienced player so I'm not sure if my opinion is worth much.

 

[BarbarianHunter]

Chateau was NERFED, not buffed, Egypt are still weak, and Canada are still trash. You also severely underestimate Kristina and (especially) Pericles.

When I first started frequenting the CivFanatics there was a thread asking what are your 5 favorite civs. I chose Pericles as one of them. Not having played him lately, I began wondering what if was I was so fond of. Now I remember!

Spoiler CPT :

Spoiler Envoys :

For my warmongering/builder hybrid moderate finish time style this is a really good start for deity.

 

[Jkchart]

View attachment 522114
Post patch, this is what I think my tier list looks like. Unordered, of course. What follows are my thoughts on the specific changes of the patch.

• Canada's tundra start bias left them with two major problems beyond the fact that their actual bonuses weren't very impactful: they lacked both production and growth, two resources that are vitally important in the early game. Thankfully, that +1 production from tundra/snow mines really helps them out in that regard. They're still quite lackluster, don't get me wrong, but they now sort of fit the archetype of a late-game culture & production juggernaut. Other Civs will still outstrip them in that regard nonetheless, but I would say that they're now competitive.

• I recently have warmed up a bit to the Great Wall, as it's actually a pretty solid defensive tool while giving ok, if not amazing yields. This buff now makes the Great Wall pretty good as a unique improvement, and one that starts out pretty decent and scales quite well. The tourism later on also makes China more competitive in Culture Victories. This buff took an admittedly mediocre improvement into one you might actually want to build, rather than being fairly situational. Still far from being as good as some other improvements in the game, but China players should appreciate this one.

• Egypt got massively buffed in this patch. The Sphinx changes have been turning some heads, and rightfully so; floodplains aren't to hard to come by (especially if you're Egypt and have a starting bias towards them), so that extra culture is pretty easy to acquire. That extra appeal just makes an improvement that was already pretty good for Culture Victories even better. But the real kicker here is that the Maryannu Chariot Archer no longer replaces the Heavy Chariot. I've been a defender of the Chariot Archer for quite a while on here, but even I had to admit that though the unit was pretty strong on its own merits, it was a massive bummer that Egypt lost out on the best city-capturing unit in the Ancient Era. Now, this is no longer the case. Yes, you'll likely have to adjust your unit build if you're playing Egypt (i.e. focus less on early ranged units so you can acquire the Chariot Archer), but if you optimize everything, Egypt is a terrifying neighbor in the early stages of the game. They're about one buff to Iteru (and maybe a new alternate leader) away from being a really, really good Civ imo.

• Finally, the Chateau is no longer a complete joke of a unique improvement! I hesitate to call it good, however, since it's requirements to get those extra yields are a bit more finicky than some others. Still, France can get pretty decent culture and gold from tiles that have these. But despite the buff, France suffers from a lack of bonuses until the Medieval and Renaissance Era, and the rewards they get from making it to that point aren't exactly awe-inspiring either. However, Catherine does get that +3 combat strength provided you play your espionage cards right, so that's something at least. Still quite underwhelming, but at least the Chateau is less of a disappointment.

• Hungary got "nerfed", and I put that term in quotations because this effectively changes nothing for them. Pearl of the Danube is still a completely disgusting ability, and Raven King still allows you to completely swarm your competition with city-state units; the only thing that has changed is that Hungary now has to put in a slight investment for their zerg-rush rather than no investment at all. These nerfs don't really hurt Hungary at all; they're now just reasonably overpowered rather than revoltingly so.

• Along with Egypt, India are the biggest winners of the patch, as it turned Dharma from a joke of a civilization ability into one that's actually really good. Extra amenities from religions in your cities is incredibly good, and with a bit of micromanagement, India can now be the kings of amenities, along with Scotland and Brazil. The extra spread charge from Missionaries also makes them much stronger in Religious Victories. (As a side note, has anyone played India in this patch? If so, can you confirm if this change extends to Apostles? If it does, than this buff is even better than I previous thought.) The extra spread from trade routes is whatever though (and an ability that I feel like Arabia should have for flavor, but hey, I'm not in charge of balancing this game, so what do I know). Chandragupta is higher on this tier list because I think his playstyle will lend more towards a multi-faith empire, and that I think Arthashastra is way better than Satyagraha. Sorry Gandhi; you're one buff from being good though!

• I don't think the patch really changes things for Mali overall, though the general nerf to Democracy is a bummer nonetheless.

• The Maori have probably got whacked by the nerf bat the hardest in this patch, but they're still good. The Marae and the Toa were admittedly really overpowered tools, so this patch just tones them down a bit for the sake of balance. The Toa is no longer a superior version of both the Varu and the Legion combined, and the Marae is no longer a free culture victory. Whatever. They're still great uniques to have for expansion and Culture Victories respectively. Everything I did say about their problematic start earlier in this thread still applies though, so I don't know if they're still quite at the top of the Immortal Tier here. But they're still an excellent Civ regardless, so Maori players shouldn't lose sleep over these nerfs.

• The buff the Netherlands got is mostly flavor, though it is a pretty decent bonus considering their starts are prone to be lowland coasts.

• I absolutely adore these buffs to Norway. Pillaging was admittedly way too abusable a mechanic, due to the ludicrous amounts of science and culture you could garner, but Norway as a Civ were too dependent on it for their viability (or what little they had of it. So what do Firaxis do? They remove that mechanic for everyone but Norway. This both rebalances the game, removing a broken strategy, while still letting the Civilization that actually needs it to retain their niche. Brilliant! Now, this doesn't fix Norways preexisting problems, but it does give them another unique tool to help them compete, which as a Norway player, I love.

• If Spain meets all the criteria for the Mission, it is an absolutely broken unique improvement now. However, colonialist playstyles aren't that great in Civ games, they never have been, and Spain is still dependent on that shoddy framework. On top of that, Spain still has major struggles in the early game. So even though the Mission is really good now, Spain's other problems still drag them down.

• One thing I don't see many people talking about is how the changes to Climate Change could really hurt Indonesia. Indonesia is more dependent on having valuable districts on the coast, and if more tiles are prone to flooding than before, that change could have dire ramifications for them. Granted, you now have more time to prepare for the rising sea levels, but the cost of Flood Barriers varies with how many tiles they'll have to protect. So overall, I'm not sure if this is a net positive or negative for Gitarja, but people should really test Indonesia out and see how they can deal with these changes. This could also hurt Australia, but their appeal-related bonuses aren't just tied to the coast, so they're more well off than Indonesia.

• So, you've probably noticed that I have the Eleanors and England in their own tier. Let's talk about why. Simply put, England is in an extremely sorry state, and I have no idea what the devs want this Civ to do. Their late game bonuses are by in large a joke, and that colonization playstyle just does not work in Civilization games, and it's even worse in Civ VI because of loyalty (unless, of course, you're Phoenicia, but that's more so because of her capital swapping gimmick). And even though Eleanor's unique ability is actually good, she suffers because she's attached to awful Civs. If you play Engleanor, you're tied to a horrible Civ that has little to no synergy with your ability. If you play Freleanor, you have absolutely no bonuses until the Medieval Era. England is garbage, and because Eleanor is associated with two garbage Civs, she unfortunately is as well.

Lots of good assessments, Jewelrunna.

I will defend Engleanor though - I had a great run with her because of the RNDY. Is it a schizophrenic design? Yes. But the massive gold potential in some ways really helped me because I could just buy great work buildings after plopping down districts and move great works at my leisure. And there's always Reyna to buy the districts too. She's not supremely awful at all - incredibly fun to play, just hampered by the fact that England overall feels like a mishmash.

EDIT: I also liked that you used civ difficulties instead of letter grades for the tiers

 

[BarbarianHunter]

Lots of good assessments, Jewelrunna.

I will defend Engleanor though - I had a great run with her because of the RNDY. Is it a schizophrenic design? Yes. But the massive gold potential in some ways really helped me because I could just buy great work buildings after plopping down districts and move great works at my leisure. And there's always Reyna to buy the districts too. She's not supremely awful at all - incredibly fun to play, just hampered by the fact that England overall feels like a mishmash.

The fact that's heresy to the standard civ board dogma about England must be why I agree with you, because you just can't be right ;-). Or can you?

 

[Pietato]

Eleanor is great. It is England and France which suck.

 

[Leucarum]

Eleanor is fun, which doesn't neccessarily mean great but also means I don't really notice power level too much when playing her...

 

[OmegaDestroyer]

Agreed. She is at least fun to play, which is more than I can say about other civs.

 

[Jkchart]

So, I did a points system with all the civs I've actually finished a game with so far scoring them in 5 areas: the Unique Units, Unique Infrastructure, Civ UA, Leader UA, and overall Synergy that these components can bring. Each area had a possible max of 2 points, with 2 representing the component is a good asset to the civ, 1 meaning it is decent, but inconsistently good (i.e. not a game changer, but something that still is useful), and 0 meaning useless, liability, or completely unnoticeable. So far, I came up with the following from what I've finished, game-wise.

America: 8 Points. 1 for the Units. They're good units, just limited in utility, especially because they're so late. 2 for the Film Studio - I think this building is incredibly undervalued and is an absolute winner for a culture victory. 2 for the Civ UA, as of GS - the wildcards are incredibly useful, and the extra favor is pretty strong of a boost. 2 for the Leader UA, because it's great for dominating your home continent all game, and their national parks are incredibly powerful. I only gave a 1 for synergy because the civ is trying to be a weird dom/culture/diplo hybrid now, but only the culture parts really fuse well enough.
Arabia: Haven't played yet.
Australia: 10 Points. Let's be real here. There's nothing bad about Australia. It's the only civ that can really make consistent use of its triggerable ability, the Digger is the only truly great modern unique unit, outback stations are OP, and their coastal bonuses put similar terrain bonuses to shame. And somehow, it all works gloriously well as a generalist civ that can do basically anything it wants.
Aztec: I haven't played Aztec yet.
Brazil: Haven't finished a game yet, but their bonuses were...underwhelming to say the least. Will score properly when I get the full experience.
Canada: I'm DREADING the attempt.
China: 7 Points. Okay, so there's wonderful culture and science synergy in the whole civ. Their Civ UA is incredibly useful, as is the Leader UA. Extra builders, more wonders, powerful eurekas/inspirations are all wonderful! 2 points each in the abilities/synergy areas. Makes a really good civ in those areas. The Great Wall is kind of cool actually, not amazing, but does give a bit of synergy with the civ itself so I gave that 1 point. The Crouching Tiger...is kind of useless? I don't think I really got any utility out of it. It's just one of those units that is "there". Plus, I'll take 2 range crossbow any day over a 1 range crouching tiger. 0 points.
Cree: 8 Points. 2 points each for the Synergy, Leader UA, and the Mekewap. All of those together create a wonderful generalist/builder civilization that can pick and choose what they want to go for. Of all the strange victory combinaitons I got, I pulled a renaissance/industrial religious victory off with them. The Okitchitaw is a good unit, but not amazing, so I only gave it 1 point. I also like the Civ UA, but it's also not overwhelmingly grand, so just one point there. I love my traders claiming tiles though
Dutch: 6 Points. Why do we play the Dutch? Polders. And Grote Rivieren. Polders can be difficult to place sometimes, but they are a strong improvement when you get that great placement. Also, it's nice that they can now be built on submerged tiles! Grote Rivieren is a pretty powerful ability as well - you can create some great adjacency bonuses where other civs don't get any. 1 Point for the De Zeven Provincien - it's strong, but there are better UUs. I did get some good utility out of it though. 1 point for Synergy - there's some good generalist synergy here, but nothing to go crazy over. No points for Wilhelmina's bonus. It's barely noticeable in the grand scheme of things. I used it when I was desperate to keep a city's loyalty, but it's rare that you can't find a better way to boost loyalty. There are far better loyalty bonuses.
Egypt: 6 Points. 2 Points for Iteru, because that itself was always quite useful. 1 point for everything else. The Maryannu is strong, but I don't find it amazing. The Sphinx is decent, but again, there are better culture/faith improvements/strategies. The Leader UA is nice, but again...not anywhere near the top of the game. There's some good culture game synergy here, but Egypt is kind of all over the place as well.
English/Eleanor: 6 Points. Don't get me wrong. I love playing Eleanor - her ability takes some set up, but when it gets going, it's too much fun. She gets 2 points for court of love. 2 Points as well for the RNDY. I think, personally, it is an underrated UI as it does a good job making coastal cities viable, and gets lots of gold. This also helps with the 1 point of synergy, since I think the RNDY's gold is excellentl, plus since there are still continents with long land connections, it can help hold flipped cities. Not the MOST synergy, but there are some good strats to be found hidden in this design, IMO. 1 point for the Civ UA - WOTW isn't something to go crazy over, but I found it marginally useful. It's certainly not TERRIBLE, but the underlying systems really need a buff to make this power as strong as they probably intended. 0 points for the Sea Dog. Another case of a unit that is just "there". Why do we have this? Jeez.
English/Victoria: I didn't finish my R/F game with them, so I won't score them until I play GS with her. But GOD was I underwhelmed. I'm not really looking forward to another game.
French/Catherine: 7 Points. Great culture game synergy - cheaper mid game wonders are always amazing. Some really good backdoor domination synergy too. Overall, I really like Catherine's France for all of her abilities. 2 Points each for the abilities and the synergy. 1 Point for the Garde Imperiale. It's a GREAT unit, limited by its availability and the fact that it is hard built. Wish it just replaced the Musketman. 0 Points for the Chateau. I built a couple, and I think I placed other things over most of them that were more useful. Underwhelming improvement, to say the least.
French/Eleanor: Gonna have to see what I can pull off here.
Georgia: I tried to do a Georgia game before GS came out...I'll try again but I won't be happy about it.
Germans: 8 Points. The Hansa is why I play this civ. The extra district in every city is awesome. There's great builder/generalist synergy here, and particularly great production possibilities for a science victory. Definitely one of my best games. Only 1 Point for the Leader UA: i like the extra military policy (extra policies are useful), but I don't care for the CS conquering bonus. Only 1 point for the U-Boat. That might be a tad generous, but I think they're a decent unit overall. Better than the Sea Dog at least...
Greek/Gorgo: 9 Points. The Hoplite is a tad underwhelming, but good for early game culture grabs with the rest of Gorgo's abilities. Just one point there. Two points for everything else. All the other stuff about Gorgo just works super well. The Acropolis is amazing. Culture from kills is great. Great synergy. Extra wildcard is really nice.
Greek/Pericles: Haven't tried him yet, but almost positive if I gave Gorgo a 9, he's around there too.
Hungarian: In progress. I'm pretty sure he's getting a high score here.
Incan: 9 Points. Only 1 for Mit'a because it's more nice flavor than anything else and makes a normally totally useless tile kind of nice. Otherwise, the Waraq'aq is great, Qhapaq Nan is awesome, Terrace farm and synergy are all wonderful. Had a blast with this one - one of my new favorites.
Indian/Chandragupta: Have yet to try.
Indian/Gandhi: Played around a bit with them in vanilla but need to try the current version.
Indonesian: Played around a bit after they came out, but kind of difficult to set up right. Will try again.
Japanese: Never finished a game with them yet; need to try again.
Khmer: 7 Points. There is some honestly great food and faith synergy for this civ. I love Grand Barays - I think it is much better than people give it credit for. Also, gimme my suicide missionaries! Prasats are a great upgrade for the temple. Domrey gets 1 point - nice unit, kind of out of place in the grand scheme of the whole civ. And as much as I like the food/faith synergy of the civ...Monasteries of the King is abysmal. It's definitely the weakest part of the civ. Plays in a bit with the rest of the civ, but isn't super useful.
Kongolese: Haven't tried yet.
Koreans: 8 Points. The Hwacha is a good defensive unit, but it's drawbacks keep it from being great. Also, Hwarang only gets 1 because it's kind of hit or miss sometimes. You can get some really good governors with lots of science/culture, but only in a few cities for most of the game. Not always easy to take advantage of. I think that Three Kingdoms is highly useful in tandem with the Seowon, and there is great synergy in the civ for a good science game (also culture). 2 points in each of those categories.
Macedonian: 10 Points. I hate admitting this, but Macedon is easily one of the best civs in the game. I think the Basilikoi Pades is the "weakest" part, but it's still REALLY good because it encourages your science growth and military expansion so well. Their units are pretty dang good, and those abilities are just OP.
Mali: I have yet to play but they're next on my list.
Maori: I have yet to play, but they are after Mali.
Mapuche: Haven't tried, but I'm curious since I like fighting them (they can bring somewhat of a challenge to conquer/war against).
Mongolian: 10 Points. There is nothing bad about Mongolia. Nothing. And it all works together better than just about any other civ in the game. They get bonuses to the best classes of combat units, as well as that fantastic doubling of diplo visibility combat bonus. This actually ended up being my best game, pleasantly surprising me. And because they can take what they need so well, they can do just about anything, too.
Norwegian: I tried playing them awhile back before any of the "buffs", but was not impressed. Will need to try again.
Nubian: 10 Points. I've loved few civs as much as this one. A builder civ that is just as dangerous in war as any warmonger civ. Extra boosts from mines. Cheap ranged units. Pitati Archers. Nubian Pyramids take some tricks but you can get some great yields from them. Cheap districts. Yes please.
Ottomans: Have yet to try.
Persians: Played around with them for a bit but didn't get a good game really going.
Phoenicians: 9 Points. I give the Bireme 1 point. It's not the greatest thing ever, but the trader protection is awesome early game. Otherwise, I had a lot of fun with Dido. Cothons are magical. Their settler spam and ability to claim any (coastal) territory and resources they want are awesome. Extra trade routes? Great. I'm a fan of cheaper government plaza stuff too. Fantastically done.
Polish: Haven't got a good game going with them yet.
Romans: Played around a bit once - need to do a full game, but I liked what I saw.
Russians: 9 Points. Grand Embassy isn't terribly grand, but it really helps early/mid game when focusing on religion so you don't stay too far behind. Otherwise, Russia is brilliantly designed. Great religion/culture games, good domination (or even just defensive) potential thanks to the Cossack. Lavras are fantastic.
Scottish: 7 Points. I love Scotland. But Bannockburn is just non-existent because of difficult requirements (0 points). It's a non-factor. Highlanders are okay as defensive units, but not anything screaming to be built (1 point). There is a GREAT science game with Scotland. Also, your cities are permanently overflowing with happiness (you work a bit for it, but golf courses can go a long way). MORE great Engineers and Scientists? Absolutely!
Scythians: I hear they're amazing - played around a bit, but need to give a serious game.
Spanish: 6 Points. I might be being generous here. But the conquistador is worth 2 points to me. Does it require micro/setup? Yes. But these bad boys were game changers in my wars. Incredibly powerful. Otherwise, everything else is just inconsistent. Mission is okay, but really moreso on foreign continents which can be trickier to set up. Abilities are fine, nothing to scream over (I like trade route bonuses though). Some imperfect synergy for religion and domination.
Sumerians: 8 Points (maybe 9). Lots of people list Sumeria as God-Tier. Which I understand. They're great. But the Leader Ability is kinda crap? Maybe it's not as bad as I think, but I didn't really find it super useful so i didn't give it any points...I could see giving it a 1 though with the new pillage buffs. But everything else IS God-Tier. The War Cart alone is enough to make me afraid. Ziggurats are a great improvement. I think that Epic Quest is awesome - extra goody huts where no one else can get them AND cheap levied units (which can get otherwise expensive). Great science/culture/dom synergy.
Swedish - 9 Points. The Carolean is good, but a tad underwhelming. Everything else synergizes perfectly for diplomatic or culture victories. OAM is OP. Nobel Prize is OP. Queen's Bibliotheque is lovely. Automatic theming is awesome. Loved my Kristina game.
Zulu - Haven't tried but i really don't like being their neighbors!

i know this is all totally subjective (and I'll update as I go), but that's how I've been doing it in my nifty chart.

Quoting my own post to bring back some recent updates:
Hungary: 9 Points. The weakest link here is the Thermal Bath, which is useful, with nice flavor, but it is quite rare that you can get the maximum usage out of it since geothermal is hard to find. I think there was ONE on my whole continent and I didn't even get it :-( Everything else is great. The unique units are powerful in their own right, and the first upgrades to the second. Hussars are excellent, and are powerful throughout a good two-three eras if you have max alliances. The Pearl of the Danube is by far the greatest thing about the Civ, and leads to some well built cities. I particularly like Raven King, even with the nerf, because it is still very useful and can insta-grab you an army. Yes, there are risks with it, but there should be a risk to getting a free army on the other side of the world. It is both OP and somewhat well balanced. Everything is wonderfully synergistic as well.

Rome: 10 Points. Okay, but I should've played this one before. First, super easy civ to use and learn, so it's a great civ for new players. Second, it's all about FREE things with the abilities. Free monuments are wonderful and allow you to race ahead in civics while giving new cities a nice little loyalty boost for some more aggressive city placements. Free roads to all of your cities with extra gold from trading posts is awesome. Their abilities all synergize wonderfully. The Bath is incredibly useful with the free extra amenity, and since it is super cheap, that helps with getting a new city up and running just about anywhere. I built those wherever I could. Last, the Legion, especially after the Toa nerf, has always been one of the more powerful unique units, good for both military AND economic purposes. Sure, the Roman Fort is mostly flavor, but being able to repair your conquests or use a critical chop to get walls into play are great, and they are still one of the most powerful early game units. Truly a well-done civ.

Norway: 7 Points. The Longship gets the UU score to 1 point because I found it incredibly useful, decently powerful, and wonderfully synergistic with Norway's overall design. The Berserker is not anywhere near as good, too expensive, and kinda in an odd place to use (plus its the only unit with a natural strength debuff on the defense, which I greatly dislike). The Stave Church is nice for coastal cities, since it boosts production, and Norway wants a lot of coastal cities. OP? No, but useful enough to merit 1 point. Knarr allows my units to move over the seas early, and embark/disembark pays no move costs. My naval melee units can heal in neutral territory. This is a nice ability that synergizes well, but certainly not a game changing ability, though the naval melee healing is pretty nice. 1 point there. Thunderbolt of the North, however, is fantastic, especially since Norway is now the only civ that gets Culture/Science from pillages, and in my experience, is VERY powerful. I've played a good enough chunk of my Norway game (about half a game) to evaluate this ability, and even with only a couple campuses and one theater square, it is good enough to allow you to stay in a good place in tech/civic advancement by raiding and plundering. Combine with raid? Even better. The +50% production to naval melee units and the ability to coastal raid means that you'll have a good size navy early, and that your raiding ability will always be useful. Somehow, this all synergizes very well as a design, so I've given it 2 points for synergy. Norway has come a LONG way since vanilla. Actually fun and great to play, even if not top tier.

I also have been trying to do Mali, before the patch, but trying to get a good start has been very difficult.

 

[Jewelrunna]

I think I'm going to write some short blurbs for the Civs, in ascending order for why I think they're where they are. Not gonna go into as much detail as I have in the past, but I think I can give some solid reasoning as why I think the Civs are where they are. For returning Civ 6 vets, I'm only going to talk about what's changed for them. As with the image, I'm not ranking within the tiers.

Victoria: At this point, I just have to assume that Firaxis just want Victoria to be bad. Getting a free naval unit out of the RND is pretty good, and getting an extra trade route for founding a city on another continent is a decent enough compromise to the extra trade route Victoria could get on launch. But why, why, is Workshop of the World so bad? They took away the one good trait that England had (that being British Museum) and replaced it with an ability that benefits units that are typically ignored/are irrelevant, and gives you laughable bonuses in the late game. I hear people talking about the potential gold England can get, but you have to bend over backwards to get those cities on other continents, and it's really not just a viable strategy to go for a colonization game in Civ; it never has been, just because you don't get low-tech natives to bully around. England really has to go out of their way to get any advantage out of their abilities, and the rewards for doing so just aren't that strong to justify it. While I don't think any leader in Civ VI is worse than a blank slate Civ (like the Iroquois in V), Victoria & England really push it.

Eleanor: Let's get this out of the way: Eleanor is not bad in and of herself. In fact, Court of Love is a pretty good unique ability. Though it takes a while to kick in, once you get a few great works in your cities, you can just start flipping cities left & right. So why is she so low? Simply put, it's because she's tied to bad Civs that don't do her any favors. If you play her with England, you're playing a Civ that's already the worst in the game and one that has no synergy with Court of Love. If you play her with France, you have a Civ that ostensibly has more synergy with her (more wonders = more great work slots), but there's one big problem: you're playing a blank slate Civ until the Medieval Era. France is only playable because of Catherine's +3 combat strength bonus throughout the game, and even despite that France is pretty mediocre. Take that away and... well, what do you have really? A lackluster unique unit and improvement combined with an ability that's good, but takes till the mid-game to come online? That's awful, in complete honesty. If Eleanor had a better set of abilities around her, she could be a really strong leader; unfortunately, she's tied to two of the worst Civs in the game, so she suffers big time as a result.

Wilfred Laurier: Prior to the patch, I would've put Canada in the "England tier", but they're slightly better. Having that tundra start bias does them no favors; they lack growth and production in the early stages of the game where they're desperately needed, and tundra farms don't make those tiles viable until you research Feudalism. However, getting +1 production from tundra mines sort of alleviates that concern, at least for production, so they at least have something to look forward to. Canada still has big problems, however. They're one of the few Civs that get direct bonuses to earning Diplo Favor, but the bonus isn't all that strong. You're really not going to get a lot of favor until the later stages of the game, and Diplo Favor is a resource you want to accrue early. Beyond that, Canada is a Civ that's just straight up outclassed by other Civs in the game where Canada tries to excel. You want to play a tundra Civ that expands their borders rapidly? Just play Russia. You wanna play a late game culture/diplo Civ? Just play America. Both those Civs do want Canada tries to do, except better. Huh, now that I'm writing this out, Canada might should be in the England tier. Though, I do think Canada is good enough in Culture and Diplomacy (while also having a unique unit that's essentially a Naturalist purchasable by gold) to be noticeably better than England. So I'm ok enough with their placing above them—but not by much.

Tamar: Ah Tamar—the forum's favorite punching bag. Prior to GS I thought that Georgia was at least better than England, but not by much; they were still comparatively awful to everyone else. However, GS gave Tamar some much needed buffs; granted, she's still bad, but she at least has some tricks up her sleeve. The Tsikhe was easily the worst unique building in the game, and it probably still is, but it got buffs to the point where it's actually viable. It's drastically cheaper than the Renaissance Walls now, meaning that this is a building that you can actually build. Granted, it's already locked behind a building you still don't want to build (Medieval Walls), but now it's something at least worth considering. You also get more faith and tourism out of the building, and that doubles while you're in a golden age. This means that Tamar can actually get a respectable amount of faith and tourism, especially faith when you can capitalize on her unique ability. The Khevsur also got indirectly buffed due to Military Tactics now being required for Mass Production. This means that beelining the unit no longer completely screws over your tech progression. The unit still isn't great to be fair, since you can't upgrade into it and it's only going to be around a short while before upgrading into Musketmen (considering that you have to raw build it). But hey, it's really strong in hills, so there's that! The biggest buff to Georgia however, is an indirect one, thanks to the addition of the World Congress and Diplomatic Victory. Since you get Diplo Favor for each City State you're suzerain over, and that Tamar has a bonus that gives her double envoys in City States that have her religion, Tamar can play the World Congress and Diplomatic Victory game really well. Granted, the rewards you get from playing the WC really aren't all that strong (unless Sweden is in the game), and the Diplomatic Victory really isn't that hard to win; it's kind of just a chore. But, she has a nice little advantage in those areas that other Civs don't, so it's something to write home about. Still, Tamar faces the same problems: her bonuses are niche and not that strong, you have to go out of your way to use them, and her best ability (the bonus towards Golden Ages) only helps you chain Golden Ages together, not earn them, so it's more of a "win harder" ability. Nonetheless, Georgia went from absolute dumpster-tier to being simply mediocre so... yay?

 

[DWilson]

I can say that I would prefer to have England's benefits (especially with Victoria), rather than Georgia's. Based on my typical game play, I feel confident I would get more out of it (plus I don't need to get a religion).

 

[OmegaDestroyer]

I'm not quite sure what the developers have against England. No other civ has managed to be wrecked by subsequent updates to the extent England has. The +1 resource accumulation is laughably poor. The extra charge on the engineer is only really useful for rushing dams. The +2 per powered cities is barely noticeable. The RND is nice but how often are you going to take advantage of the free naval unit? Chances are when you're expanding, your conquering, and it doesn't do you any good then. Same with the free melee unit. Speaking of, while I really like the Redcoats as a unit, they are not worth building over other units. Sure, you might get a free one here or there but, again, you're probably conquering more-so than colonizing at that point.

It truly baffles me that a civilization as historically powerful & important as the British Empire is significantly weaker than the likes of Australia, Korea, and others.

 

[Leucarum]

I think a large part of the problem is that Victoria is themed around a mechanic which isn't all that useful. Colonization isn't as good as conquest and by the midgame the best land will usually already be taken and loyalty makes it a challenge to settle in the bits that aren't. A weak, unsynergistic bonus to industrial production doesn't help even if it is thematic.

I think they need to pick a direction for her and go all in, at the moment she lacks focus. If they want to go all in on colonization for victoria they will be fighting their own mechanics though. Bonuses to make colonial cities more viable would go a long way. Personally I'd love it if outside of her home continent she could naturally expand borders into/buy other civs' tiles. Though i doubt that would really fix her power level it would be fun, thematic and give her something unique.

 

[Arianrhod]

Bonuses to make colonial cities more viable would go a long way.

Random idea: what if the "Settler" upgraded throughout the game?

For example, a Renaissance era tech (perhaps Exploration) would allow them to upgrade into Colonists, who would found 4-pop cities instead of 1-pop cities. And then a Modern or late Industrial era tech (I'd say Urbanization or Mass Media) could upgrade them further into Pioneers, which found 4-pop cities but give you a free Harbor, Holy Site, Encampment, or Commercial Hub in the city if one can be built?

 

[The googles do nothing]

For example, a Renaissance era tech (perhaps Exploration) would allow them to upgrade into Colonists, who would found 4-pop cities instead of 1-pop cities. And then a Modern or late Industrial era tech (I'd say Urbanization or Mass Media) could upgrade them further into Pioneers, which found 4-pop cities but give you a free Harbor, Holy Site, Encampment, or Commercial Hub in the city if one can be built?

That's a really good idea. It would justify the rising cost of settlers. The only problem negates the value of a large cities loyalty and large cities are less valuable then they should be. Giving a escalating boost like that to Victoria (and perhaps Spain) makes sense.